Meta-analytic approaches to determine gender differences for delayed healing in venous leg ulcers

A Contemporary Comparison of Cyanoacrylate, Radiofrequency, and Endovenous Laser Ablation on Healing of Active Venous Ulceration

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study is to compare the healing rates of active lower extremity venous ulcers for patients receiving one of 3 ablation methods, compare their complications, and identify factors affecting successful healing and prevention of recurrence.

METHODS

For this study, data were collected retrospectively on 146 patients at a single institution, tertiary referral center, with an active venous ulcer who underwent ablation therapy via cyanoacrylate (VenaSeal), radiofrequency (RFA), or endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) from 2010 to 2020.

RESULTS

The study showed a nonsignificant difference in days to ulcer healing postintervention between ablative techniques, with 80.8 days for cyanoacrylate ablation (n = 15), 70.07 for RFA (n = 44), and 67.04 days for EVLA (n = 79). A similar, nonsignificant trend was observed for ulcer recurrence, with a rate of 35.7% (5/14) for cyanoacrylate ablation, 26.7% (20/75) for EVLA, and 23.1% (9/39) for RFA. The same nonsignificant trend occurred with deep venous thrombosis following the procedure in 6.3% (1/16) of cyanoacrylate ablation, 4.8% (4/84) of EVLA, and 2.2% (1/46) of RFA cases. The rate of endovenous glue induced thrombosis was also higher (6.3%) for cyanoacrylate than endovenous heat induced thrombosis in EVLA (3.6%) and RFA (2.2%). Cox proportional hazard was significant for compliance with compression therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 2.12, confidence interval [CI] 95% = 1.10-4.20, P = 0.031) and a lack of working with a wound clinic (HR 0.50, CI 95% = 0.33-0.75, P = 0.001) were associated with the decreased time to healing of ulcer but was not influenced by the presence of other comorbidities of smoking or diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates a trend toward cyanoacrylate ablation having longer healing times and more complications compared to other ablation methods when used in patients with active venous ulcers. Compliance with compression treatment is predictive of venous ulcer healing and working with a wound clinic had significantly longer healing times.

Biomodulation induced by fluorescent light energy versus standard of care in venous leg ulcers: a retrospective study

Objective:

The recently completed EUREKA study confirmed the efficacy and safety profile of fluorescent light energy (FLE) in treating hard-to-heal wounds. To supplement the EUREKA prospective, observational, uncontrolled trial results, researchers selected one of the EUREKA clinical centres to conduct a retrospective analysis of matching wound care data for 46 venous leg ulcers (VLU) patients who had received standard wound care over a five-year period, compared with 10 EUREKA VLU subjects.

Method:

The study centre selected 46 patients with VLUs based on the matching criteria (wound age and size, patient's age and gender). They compared the healing rates of these matching VLUs with 10 VLU patients treated at the same centre during the EUREKA study.

Results:

The EUREKA patients had larger and significantly older wounds (p<0.05) and significantly more risk factors (p<0.05) than the matching wounds. However, they had better outcomes (EUREKA: 40% versus matching group: 7% for full wound closure by 16 weeks). No wound breakdown was observed at 16 weeks in the EUREKA group, compared with 25% in the matching group. No EUREKA patient developed infections requiring antibiotics, compared with 37% in the matching group. EUREKA wounds had a mean relative wound area regression (RWAR) of 32% at week six and 50% at week 16, compared with −3% at week six and −6% at week 16 for the matching group.

Conclusion:

These findings show that the system based on FLE was well-tolerated and efficacious, with better clinical outcome results compared with the wounds analysed in this retrospective matching study and treated with standard of care alone.